Latest news with #freepress
The Independent
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
Bob Costas calls out legacy press for paying ‘ransom' to Trump and pivoting to ‘MAGA media'
Veteran sportscaster Bob Costas declared this week that the 'free press is under attack' while assailing mainstream media outlets for kowtowing to Donald Trump and paying the president a 'ransom,' claiming that 'these are ongoing assaults' to the First Amendment. During his speech at Monday night's Mirror Awards in New York City, where he received the Fred Dressler Leadership Award for making 'distinct, consistent and unique contributions to the public's understanding of the media,' Costas took the opportunity to call out ABC News for capitulating to the president. Shortly after Trump won the 2024 election, ABC's parent company Disney decided to settle the president's defamation lawsuit against the news network and anchor George Stephanopoulos for $15 million. Trump claimed that he was defamed when Stephanopoulos said in an interview that the president had been found liable for raping writer E. Jean Carroll, when a jury instead found Trump liable for sexually abusing her. 'All they should've said was, 'George misspoke. The president, that paragon of virtue, was only found guilty of sexual assault, not rape. So we stand corrected.' They didn't have to pay a $15 million ransom,' the 12-time Olympic host declared. He also took issue with Shari Redstone, the chief shareholder of CBS News' parent company Paramount Global. With Redstone standing to make billions of dollars in a merger with Skydance Media, she has pushed the company to agree to settle Trump's lawsuit over a 60 Minutes interview with Kamala Harris, which legal experts have deemed frivolous and the news channel has said is 'completely without merit.' In recent months, 60 Minutes executive producer Bill Owens and CBS News chief Wendy McMahon – who both said they would not apologize for the interview – have resigned amid internal tensions over the pending settlement. The conglomerate's board has already offered Trump a $15 million settlement, which the president has rejected as he's reportedly demanding at least $25 million (plus $25 million in free airtime) along with an apology. 'And did Shari Redstone, because she wants to affect a merger that Trump's FCC can stand in the way of, did she have to besmirch and undercut the gold standard in our lifetime of broadcast journalism – 60 Minutes? Paying $20 million in ransom to Trump is just the cost of doing business when there are billions of dollars at stake,' Costas sighed. 'These are ongoing assaults on the basic idea of a free press.' Throughout the rest of his speech, which was captured on video by journalist Rachel Sklar, Costas bemoaned that the Trump administration was engaging in a full-fledged war against the media. 'The free press is under attack. Democracy as we know it is under attack,' he noted. At the same time, he scolded news organizations for seemingly bending the knee to the president and presenting 'both-sides' coverage in an effort to appease Trump and his supporters. 'But if the answer to that is MAGA media, if the answer to that is Donald Trump's view of the world, which is only through a prism of what benefits him, there are no higher ideals,' he stated. 'There are no principles at work other than what benefits him. I'll stay with where we are without correction if the correction is what Donald Trump represents.' Costas added that due to Trump having 'been normalized,' everything the president does or says forces 'responsible journalists' to 'have to pretend that there's always two sides to this,' prompting him to criticize CNN, a network he joined as a contributor in 2020. 'There really isn't two sides to much of what Donald Trump represents,' he said. 'And the idea that you have to find somebody who will not just defend Donald Trump but valorize it, even on CNN or wherever else, just in the name of being balanced – look, if someone is contending that the Earth is flat in order to appear objective, you are not required to say 'well, maybe it might be oblong.' No, it's not!' After observing that the president 'has absolutely no regard' for 'basic American principles and basic common decency', the legendary play-by-play announcer ended his remarks by relaying how fans of his have turned on him over his recent outspokenness on politics. 'And of course, when I did that, every good thing I did for 40 years was washed away,' he concluded. 'Now I suck. You know what? If that's what you think, and that's how you think, and you think it in defense of that guy, I wear that as a badge of honor.'
CNN
2 days ago
- Politics
- CNN
Bob Costas: Trump's attacks on the media are unlike anything in my lifetime
'The free press is under attack,' Bob Costas said at an awards ceremony Monday evening. 'Democracy as we know it is under attack.' The famed sports broadcaster was at the Edison Ballroom podium in New York, accepting a lifetime achievement Mirror Award for his 'distinct, consistent and unique contributions to the public's understanding of the media.' What began as a speech reflecting upon a 50-year career in sports journalism quickly became a scorching sermon about the state of sports media and the threats to the free press coming from President Donald Trump. 'What's happening now are not matters of small degree,' Costas, 73, said of the Trump administration's attacks on journalism, including personal lawsuits, FCC investigations, and crackdowns on press access. 'They're different in kind to anything certainly in my lifetime and maybe in the history of the American presidency.' Get Reliable Sources newsletter Sign up here to receive Reliable Sources with Brian Stelter in your inbox. The president 'intimidated ABC into reviewing George Stephanopoulos,' Costas said of the network settling Trump's 2024 defamation lawsuit brought against it after the star anchor repeatedly said on-air that Trump had been 'found liable for rape' in the E. Jean Carroll case when a jury had found him liable for sexual abuse. 'All they should have said was George misspoke,' the sportscaster said. 'They didn't have to pay a $15 million ransom.' Costas then turned his attention to CBS News. 'Did Shari Redstone — because she wants to effect a merger that Trump's FCC could stand in the way of — did she have to besmirch and undercut the gold standard in our lifetime of broadcast journalism, '60 Minutes?'' Redstone, 71, currently controls Paramount Global, the global media company that owns CBS News. She is seeking to sell her stake in the company as part of a merger with Skydance Media, but the deal needs approval from the Trump administration. As a result, Redstone has reportedly sought to settle the president's lawsuit against CBS over a '60 Minutes' segment — a lawsuit that legal experts have repeatedly deemed bogus — sparking outcry from the network's journalists. 'Paying $20 million in ransom to Trump is just the cost of doing business when there's billions of dollars at stake,' Costas remarked. (ABC and CBS did not immediately respond to requests for comment.) 'These are ongoing assaults on the basic idea of a free press,' he said. 'It does not mean that we are without fault,' Costas said. 'It does not mean that the legacy or mainstream media doesn't screw up from time to time or have blind spots or misplaced narratives.' However, he added, 'if the answer to that is MAGA media, if the answer to that is Donald Trump's view of the world, which is only through a prism of what benefits him… I'll stay where we are.' 'I used to love Bob Costas, but then he turned political,' Costas said he's often heard from sports fans. 'You know what, if that's what you think and that's how you think and you think it in defense of that guy, I wear that as a badge of honor.' Costas has often drawn criticism from fellow sports broadcasters for using his perch to bring attention to political issues. In one particularly famous instance in December 2012, he devoted his 'Sunday Night Football' segment to make a plea for gun control after a Kansas City Chiefs linebacker shot and killed his girlfriend and then himself outside the team's practice facility. Costas, who left NBC Sports in 2019 after 40 years there, also lamented the current state of sports broadcasting, which he said 'tragically' lacks in-depth coverage of the political and social issues intimately connected to the games themselves. Such issues, he said, 'need to be covered, not during the game, not in between pitches, or in between free throws, but at some point need to be covered.' Costas suggested that broadcasters have become deferential to the sports leagues, avoiding interrogative questions or controversial topics altogether. 'With all the hundreds and hundreds of hours of coverage, let's say, of the NFL, can't there be a 'Meet the Press'-style interview of [commissioner] Roger Goodell somewhere?' He quipped: 'Sports isn't brain surgery, but it doesn't have to be brain dead either.'
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Labour plan to let foreign states team up to own newspapers sparks alarm
Labour's plan to let foreign powers own shares in newspapers has sparked alarm that they could team up to gain sway over Britain's free press. Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary, has proposed laws to allow states to hold passive stakes of up to 15pc in newspapers and news websites. There is no planned rule on what portion a group of foreign states could own, however, raising concerns in the House of Lords over 'where will it end?' The legislation is partly intended to dispel the uncertainty faced by The Telegraph since a takeover bid led by the United Arab Emirates was blocked by the Conservatives over a year ago. By easing an existing outright ban on foreign state ownership, Ms Nandy's plan is also meant to help improve British relations with the wealthy Gulf state, which were damaged by the saga. The UAE is now expected to become a silent minority shareholder in a consortium led by RedBird Capital Partners, the US private equity firm which was previously the junior partner in its bid. The Conservative Party leadership has said it will support a limit of 15pc. However, after analysing the proposed statutory instrument, the Tory peer Baroness Stowell, a pivotal figure in the rebellion that derailed the UAE bid, has written to Ms Nandy to demand changes. Baroness Stowell, who has said she will not oppose single passive stakes of up to 15pc, told The Telegraph: 'Without a cumulative limit on foreign state shareholdings you have to ask where will it end? 'You could have countries teaming up to seek influence. I don't understand why this hasn't been addressed in the proposed legislation. It may be that there are other ways the Government believes it can address this risk. If so, let's hear it and debate it.' Ministers have other powers to block foreign investments, such as those they believe are a potential threat to British security, under the National Security and Investment Act. Lord Fox, the Liberal Democrats' culture spokesman in the Lords, backed Baroness Stowell's demand for a rethink and said there were 'glaring loopholes … ready to be taken advantage of by foreign states'. He added: 'It's wrong that this Government has no qualms with multiple states owning unlimited aggregate stakes in British papers. The independence of UK media must not be made subject to foreign sway. 'We are pressing peers from right across the House to stand with us, block this legislation and defend press freedom.' The Liberal Democrats have tabled a rare 'fatal motion' in the Lords to obstruct Ms Nandy's legislation. They argue that it would effectively overturn the ban on foreign state ownership approved by Parliament last year. Some Conservative peers, led by Lord Forsyth, are expected to back the bid to block the legislation. He has said the idea that a stake of 15pc could be entirely passive was 'utterly naive'. The Conservatives originally proposed a limit of just 5pc to allow sovereign wealth funds to make small passive investments in newspapers, such as via share index trackers. Ms Nandy opted to increase the limit three-fold after lobbying on behalf of Rupert Murdoch and Lord Rothermere, the owner of The Daily Mail. She agreed with them that a 5pc limit would cut news publishers off from a potentially vital source of international capital at a turbulent time as the decline of print accelerates. It is not clear whether any foreign state has already made an equity or debt investment in a UK news publisher. The Independent news website, controlled by Lord Lebedev, sold a 30pc stake to a Saudi investor in 2017. A subsequent Ofcom investigation explored potential links between the investor and the Saudi state but did not draw conclusions. The Independent subsequently formed an editorial and commercial partnership with a Saudi state media company. Under Ms Nandy's proposals, she will have a duty to trigger regulatory investigations when there are concerns of foreign state influence. Baroness Stowell said there was a need to ensure MPs and peers had a bigger role, with a guarantee that questions about press freedom would be heard in the chamber. Questions she attempted to ask about the fate of The Telegraph were rejected by parliamentary officials in consultation with the Government on three occasions. Baroness Stowell said: 'My concern is that Parliament has all the tools it needs to protect freedom of the press. This is especially important given the proposals from the Government create an ongoing duty to monitor and investigate issues with foreign state investors. 'When it comes to press freedom it is critical that Parliament can ask any questions it sees fit.' The Department for Culture, Media and Sport was asked for comment. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
28-05-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Labour plan to let foreign states team up to own newspapers sparks alarm
Labour's plan to let foreign powers own shares in newspapers has sparked alarm that they could team up to gain sway over Britain's free press. Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary, has proposed laws to allow states to hold passive stakes of up to 15pc in newspapers and news websites. There is no planned rule on what portion a group of foreign states could own, however, raising concerns in the House of Lords over 'where will it end?' The legislation is partly intended to dispel the uncertainty faced by The Telegraph since a takeover bid led by the United Arab Emirates was blocked by the Conservatives over a year ago. By easing an existing outright ban on foreign state ownership, Ms Nandy's plan is also meant to help improve British relations with the wealthy Gulf state, which were damaged by the saga. The UAE is now expected to become a silent minority shareholder in a consortium led by RedBird Capital Partners, the US private equity firm which was previously the junior partner in its bid. The Conservative Party leadership has said it will support a limit of 15pc. However, after analysing the proposed statutory instrument, the Tory peer Baroness Stowell, a pivotal figure in the rebellion that derailed the UAE bid, has written to Ms Nandy to demand changes. Baroness Stowell, who has said she will not oppose single passive stakes of up to 15pc, told The Telegraph: 'Without a cumulative limit on foreign state shareholdings you have to ask where will it end? 'You could have countries teaming up to seek influence. I don't understand why this hasn't been addressed in the proposed legislation. It may be that there are other ways the Government believes it can address this risk. If so, let's hear it and debate it.' Ministers have other powers to block foreign investments, such as those they believe are a potential threat to British security, under the National Security and Investment Act. Lord Fox, the Liberal Democrats' culture spokesman in the Lords, backed Baroness Stowell's demand for a rethink and said there were 'glaring loopholes … ready to be taken advantage of by foreign states'. He added: 'It's wrong that this Government has no qualms with multiple states owning unlimited aggregate stakes in British papers. The independence of UK media must not be made subject to foreign sway. 'We are pressing peers from right across the House to stand with us, block this legislation and defend press freedom.' The Liberal Democrats have tabled a rare 'fatal motion' in the Lords to obstruct Ms Nandy's legislation. They argue that it would effectively overturn the ban on foreign state ownership approved by Parliament last year. Some Conservative peers, led by Lord Forsyth, are expected to back the bid to block the legislation. He has said the idea that a stake of 15pc could be entirely passive was 'utterly naive'. The Conservatives originally proposed a limit of just 5pc to allow sovereign wealth funds to make small passive investments in newspapers, such as via share index trackers. Ms Nandy opted to increase the limit three-fold after lobbying on behalf of Rupert Murdoch and Lord Rothermere, the owner of The Daily Mail. She agreed with them that a 5pc limit would cut news publishers off from a potentially vital source of international capital at a turbulent time as the decline of print accelerates. It is not clear whether any foreign state has already made an equity or debt investment in a UK news publisher. The Independent news website, controlled by Lord Lebedev, sold a 30pc stake to a Saudi investor in 2017. A subsequent Ofcom investigation explored potential links between the investor and the Saudi state but did not draw conclusions. The Independent subsequently formed an editorial and commercial partnership with a Saudi state media company. Under Ms Nandy's proposals, she will have a duty to trigger regulatory investigations when there are concerns of foreign state influence. Baroness Stowell said there was a need to ensure MPs and peers had a bigger role, with a guarantee that questions about press freedom would be heard in the chamber. Questions she attempted to ask about the fate of The Telegraph were rejected by parliamentary officials in consultation with the Government on three occasions. Baroness Stowell said: 'My concern is that Parliament has all the tools it needs to protect freedom of the press. This is especially important given the proposals from the Government create an ongoing duty to monitor and investigate issues with foreign state investors. 'When it comes to press freedom it is critical that Parliament can ask any questions it sees fit.'
The Guardian
21-05-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
EU urged to act over Hungarian legislation which could restrict free press
More than 90 editors-in-chief and publishers from across Europe have signed a statement calling on the EU to take action over proposed legislation in Hungary, warning that, if passed, it could result in 'effectively outlawing the free press'. Earlier this month, Viktor Orbán's rightwing populist party, Fidesz, put forward legislation that would allow the government to monitor, penalise and potentially ban organisations that receive any sort of foreign funding, including donations or EU grants. The proposal was immediately criticised by opposition politicians, who said it would pave the way for the government to potentially shut down all independent media and NGOs engaged in public affairs. The statement published this week, signed by leading media voices from 23 countries, described the draft bill as being in line with 'the authoritarian tactics' seen in Russia under Vladimir Putin, in a reference to the country's 'foreign agent' law. The Hungarian legislation, which would allow the government to blacklist organisations, levy steep fines on them and ban them from receiving donations, had been written 'so broadly that it could be applied to virtually any organisation involved in public life or debate,' it said. The latest move by Orbán – who is facing an unprecedented challenge from a former member of the Fidesz elite, Péter Magyar, before elections next year – was particularly significant given the wider political context, it added. 'The survival of a free press is not a local issue, especially in a region where more and more populist leaders are borrowing techniques from Viktor Orbán.' The statement, whose signatories included the Guardian's editor-in-chief, Katharine Viner as well as editors from Libération in France and Gazeta Wyborcza in Poland, called on the EU and governments across Europe to do all they could to prevent the draft law from being passed. Since Orbán's return to power in 2010, he has been repeatedly accused of working to weaken democratic institutions and undermine the rule of law in Hungary. Those who have borne the brunt of this crackdown include independent media, with press freedom plunging as Orbán is accused of wielding state subsidies to reward pro-government outlets and starve critical media. Weakened media outlets have, at times, been snapped up by entrepreneurs loyal to Orbán and turned into government mouthpieces, resulting in Fidesz and its loyalists now controlling more than 80% of the country's media. This month's draft law, however, has been described by critics as one of Orbán's boldest moves to-date. 'Its aim is to silence all critical voices and eliminate what remains of Hungarian democracy once and for all,' a joint statement, signed by hundreds of civil society and media organisations, recently noted. The Hungarian Helsinki committee (HHC), a human rights organisation, described the draft legislation as a 'dark turn in Hungary's erosion of democratic norms.' In a statement, Márta Pardavi, the organisation's co-chair, added: 'If this bill passes, it will not simply marginalise Hungary's independent voices – it will extinguish them.' The HHC is among the many organisations who are scrambling to have the EU intervene before Fidesz uses its parliamentary majority to pass the legislation in mid-June. 'The consequences reverberate beyond Hungary's borders and are already spreading,' said Pardavi. 'This model of illiberal repression is designed to be exported. The European Union must act decisively before this anti-democratic playbook becomes the new norm.' The sentiment was echoed by Transparency International. 'If adopted, this law will be immediately weaponised against those trying to preserve the rule of law in Hungary,' said Nick Aiossa, the director at Transparency International EU, in a statement. 'The EU institutions cannot and must not sit idly by while Hungary targets civil society and destroys democracy from the inside.' Zoltán Kovács, a spokesperson for the Hungarian government, had said the bill had been introduced amid worries that foreign-funded organisations, primarily from the US and Brussels, were being used to shape the country's political discourse. On Wednesday, 26 EU lawmakers from across the political spectrum weighed in, signing a letter calling for Brussels to freeze all funding to Hungary. After years of being at loggerheads with the EU, there had been little meaningful progress, said the letter penned by German Green MEP Daniel Freund and seen by the Guardian. Instead the country had seen further 'alarming regressions,' citing examples such as the recent law banning Budapest's Pride parade and the draft legislation aimed at silencing government critics. 'Continuing to fund a corrupt regime openly undermining European values is unacceptable,' the letter noted. 'At a moment when Europe faces profound external challenges, we must stand united in defence of democracy and fundamental rights, resisting any drift towards authoritarianism in our union.'
